Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Was anyone actually SURPRISED that a group of cops clearly guilty of several felonies got AWAY with it?
Sadly, no. It seems that cops can get away with anything and all this does is give them all the more confidence to do whatever they please knowing darn well no jury will convict them.
Did they lose their jobs? I wasn't paying that much attention but I heard they were found "not guilty" on the major charges but guilty of some departmental BS charges. I didn't hear about them losing their jobs/pensions. I hope they do. Dirtbags.
Okay, I saw the news this morning and, you're right, they both lost their jobs. They still have to face sentencing on the charges they were convicted of and they are facing a year --- a whole year! --- in jail. I'm sure they won't do a day. They'll probably get "a fine and probation". What a crock!
Okay, I saw the news this morning and, you're right, they both lost their jobs. They still have to face sentencing on the charges they were convicted of and they are facing a year --- a whole year! --- in jail. I'm sure they won't do a day. They'll probably get "a fine and probation". What a crock!
The mayor fired them, and they lost all their pension as well. they will probably not serve the year sentence. But they did duin their careers, isn't one married?, i would assume that is over as well.
i saw both of them on TV this morning, I can see guilt written all over their face.
Policeman;
Uniform- check
badge - check
gun - check
condoms -check
pen and paper - check
hat - check
They also were cleared of the burglary charges, the one charge I thought would stick. I mean they took this woman's keys, entered and left her apartment three times that night, made false 911 calls to cover it up, and are on video tape entering the building, and still skate on the burglary charge
From my limited knowledge of the case, I think they are both guilty as hell. No DNA really is a non-issue for me. The cop can't be that stupid to rape her raw. Raking her over the coals for her civil lawsuit is also bull****. Of course she should sue. She was raped by a ****ing police officer who was called to assist her. Instead, one raped her and one stood lookout. Who wouldn't sue? It somehow makes her less credible b/c she wants to be compensated for being physically raped?
And as far as the "buyer's remorse" argument... ie she went with it and then cried 'rape' the next day, the cops were not charged under the "forcible compulsion" subsection of the rape statute. They were charged with raping her when she was "incapable of consenting at the time b/c she was physically helpless," ie unable to consent b/c she was entirely intoxicated. I mean, the testimony of her appearance in the cab which caused the cops to report in the first place is evidence that she was "physically helpless."
I'm not surprised that they were acquitted. It's bull****, but I did expect them to walk on the rape charges. I also expected them to walk on the burglary charge since that crime requites the People to prove that they cops had the intent to commit a crime at the very moment they entered her apartment. The jury did not buy that a rape occurred so they could not have found that the cops intended to commit the crime of rape upon entry into her apartment. As for stealing her keys, I expected the jury to rationalize the not-guilty verdict for burglary based upon stealing her keys by saying that there was not sufficient evidence that the cops intended to steal the keys upon entry as opposed to entering the apartment, seeing the keys, and then deciding the steal the keys once in the apartment. That is actually an argument that is legally justified.
The acquittal on the felony for falsifying business record is complete and utter bull****. That crime required the People to prove that the cops caused a false entry to be made in the internal records of the police department by either committing another crime or in order to conceal the commission of their crime. That charge was a no-brainer. The cops admitted making a bogus police call so that they would be have the opportunity to return to the victim's apartment. That bogus call prompted the police dispatcher to make a false entry into the PD's internal records, ie the cops caused that false entry to me made. And it was made to conceal the commission of, at the very least the crime of official misconduct, the crime for which the cops were convicted. How can the jury possible rationalize an acquittal on that charge? It's bull**** b/c the falsifying business records charge is a felony and they could have been sentenced to 1 1/3 - 4 years in State Prison for that charge alone. The misdemeanor of official misconduct only exposes the to a county jail sentence as opposed to State Prison. And, IMO, there is no way that the judge will sentence these criminals to any jail time. Complete and utter bull****.
Last edited by Zachary90; 05-27-2011 at 10:51 AM..
Also, Mata's reaction that "finally people see that I was innocent all this time" is moronic. I can't even form the words to react to that statement. Yo, Frank, you were acquitted b/c the jury f'ed up and ignored the fact that the People have to prove the defendants guilty beyond a REASONABLE doubt.
Speaking of reasonable, is it reasonable to believe the cops' story.... that they went back to the apartment so many times to counsel her on the dangers of alcoholism? Are you kidding me? Even if you wanted to buy that the cops wanted to do that (which is simply laughable, IMO) could the cops have reasonably thought they they could get through to the victim about alcoholism while she was stone cold drunk herself? At the very least, the time to offer alcohol support would be when she recovered from passing out in a cab and shook off the effects of her intoxication which caused her to be physically helpless... definitely not while she was still afflicted with the effects of her intoxication. Yet that's the story the cops went with and the jury apparently bought that smokescreen.
I haven't seen/read enough to feel they are guilty of rape. But they still behaved very poorly on the job and showed extremely poor judgement to say the least. I feel they are guilty of the other charges but I would need to see more to say they are guilty of the rape charge.
Please...what population pool are these IDIOT jurors being drawn from?
I was never really convinced about his 'admission'...throughout the transcript he denied it multiple times and it sounded as if he was just saying anything to end the conversation as it dragged on. Even after that she continued to ask him the same question over and over again and he continued to deny it while not knowing that he was being secretly recorded.
ANy evidence that would suggest otherwise is circumstantial and highly suspect IMO. Their actions that night were totally questionable--and originally i thought they were guilty as sin, but when they ran the DNA test over the bedroom and found nothing (but the remains from other men) and no residue from the latex or semen in her private area (which she admitted that she didn't clean)...enough doubt was cast in my mind. She had a bruised cervix but nothing conclusive enough to say that rape happened...and if it did happen, there's no telling what happened before she got in the cab. Overall Iwasn't sold on her story. On the otheside of that argument, I really don't think they had legimitate reasons to behave the way that they did. I couldn't even begin to rationalize the lies.
Last edited by itshim; 05-27-2011 at 03:19 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The cop admitted he used a condom
